Rumors : agency fee and WCTA endorsement

Let me directly address the rumor mill and the insinuations being spread about WCTA’s endorsement of me and the three other candidates they have endorsed. At no time, in the WCTA questionnaire or in the candidate interview or in discussions with anyone associated with the WCTA, was I offered nor did I accept a deal to vote for agency fees in exchange for the association’s endorsement. Period.

At the 10/11 candidate forum questions were asked about the availability of the responses to the WCTA candidate questionnaire and about whether candidates would vote to institute an agency fee for members of the teachers bargaining unit.

According to Mr. Becker, the WCTA president, the candidate questionnaires have been available for review by anyone at their office. He also said those questionnaires would be shared with the Herald-Mail. Rather than wait for the newspaper, I have shared my questionnaire responses on this web site. See questions 20 and 21 for my response about agency fees.

Here’s my understanding of agency fees. Just like taxes and Social Security, everyone who benefits from a service should help pay for that service. We drive on roads and educate our children at schools funded through taxpayer money. We receive Social Security benefits when we retire or become disabled and have contributed towards those payments throughout our working life. Likewise, in the case of teachers working in public education in Maryland, if a group is required by law to negotiate your working contract and represent you in contract disputes, then you should be willing to share in the cost of those services. That’s what agency fee does.

However, just like any other concept, the devil is in the details. I support the concept of agency fees but would I vote to institute them in Washington County? That depends on the details of the proposal that comes before the board. I support the concept of paying taxes but that does not mean that if I were a legislator I would automatically vote for every tax increase. Again, the devil is in the details.

In my time on the board I have voted against specific proposals dealing with general concepts that I support. Two examples: I support the concept of technology in education but voted against the first digital learning plan. I voted for the second plan because of specific improvements included in that version. I support the concept of small learning communities and arts education but voted against the initial academic hub proposal. When my specific concerns were addressed by the county urban development proposal, the second version of the academic hub, I wholeheartedly supported it.

I believe my voting record shows that I am not a rubber stamp for any interest group, superintendent, board faction, government body, political party, or the WCTA.